G Cross:
"but over-blown concerns about short-term deficit spending prevented us from doing so."
How did you conclude that the deficit spending is short-term? That's not what Obama's budget numbers show. You're entirely unique in your perspective.

"many polls showed that people were against the bill but in favor of its actual provisions, so I am very skeptical against this claim."
Yes, I eat candy too until I am told that candy makes one fat, then I no longer like candy. When the polls indicated the costs of the provisions, the people again didn't like the bill.

"In fact, given that in the past decade they have advocated for unfunded tax cuts, wars, and Medicare expansions, they really have no credibility at all on this manner."
You're right- both parties are corrupt which is why smaller government works best because neither party can be trusted.

Tzimisces wrote: Apr 7th 2011 10:03 GMT
"What I find more interesting...This question I think might have more to say about why conservatives dislike the state in America while liberals don't. This isn't the case in conservative societies everywhere, and particularly in authoritarian states where conservatives tend to be very pro-state."

Tzimisces, I think you are definitely onto something. Could it just be that John McCain is not the only Libertarian left in the Republican Party, or that the Libertarian outgrowth of 18th Century thought has had a continuing effect on the GOP?

McGenius: "In my memory of about a month ago recalls all the Democrats in the Wisconsin State Senate flee the state in order to avoid voting on a bill. That kind of behavior, which is pretty extreme to me when you get elected to represent a community and then to flee your post."

That is a reasonable point, though the blogger might have specifically been referring to Democrats on the national level.

First, the reason why spending increased so much was because we were in a recession and so we needed to apply a fiscal stimulus. It wasn't Obama's fault that this happened on his watch. If anything, we probably should have done *more* so that we would be better off in the long term, but over-blown concerns about short-term deficit spending prevented us from doing so.

Second, whether "ObamaCara" was passed against their wishes is arguable; many polls showed that people were against the bill but in favor of its actual provisions, so I am very skeptical against this claim.

Finally, it is true that the Republicans are starting with cuts, but they are doing so in the manner that causes the most pain with the least effect, which is exactly the *wrong* way to go about fixing the deficit. It is almost as if they don't *really* care about the deficit so much as about cutting programs that they simply don't like. In fact, given that in the past decade they have advocated for unfunded tax cuts, wars, and Medicare expansions, they really have no credibility at all on this manner.

"Democrats have never, in my political memory, pulled any political stunt as extreme as actually shutting down the government in defence of their policy or ideological convictions."
Really? In my memory of about a month ago recalls all the Democrats in the Wisconsin State Senate flee the state in order to avoid voting on a bill. That kind of behavior, which is pretty extreme to me when you get elected to represent a community and then to flee your post. In the private sector you'd get fired, in the military you'd be dutifully executed.

"Jonathan Chait argues that what we have here is a structural issue that forces Democratic politicians to be wimpy." So the Democratic base is composed of Teamsters and Race Baiters and they elect wimpy politicians? Moderation doesn't get you to multi-trillion dollar deficits that come down to a single vote.

"Openness, meanwhile, in addition to making people more liberal." Are you arguing that Obama is open or that he is not a liberal? The man that gives press conferences and perhaps answers fewer questions. Think liberals are open, try proposing to a liberal that he/she is not descended from a monkey and see how "open" that liberal is.

Other than that, it's interesting to see how liberals view themselves.

Also, RR, it wasn't the Republicans who gave the Democrats the money out of the goodness of their hearts. It was the taxpayers who gave them this money by electing them to power. It is also those same taxpayers who kept the Democrats in control of the Senate. So ultimately it is the taxpayers who are expressing their will for Planned Parenthood to continue to be funded. Since the Republicans do not have the votes to pass legislation changing this policy from its currents status --- and even if they could, such a policy would most likely be vetoed by Obama --- it is they who are going against the will of the people as expressed by their elected representatives by using the process of extortion instead.

Record numbers of voters went to the polls and sent a lot of Democrats home at the national and state level. The American public is furious about the spending the Democrats did in two years tripling the debt and passing Obama care against the majority of their wishes.These people were sent to Washington to cut spending.Democrats failed to pass a budget when they had all branches of the government last year. The Republicans do have a budget that starts the cutting. Democrats see a chance to demagogue this. Polls say it is not working.No one likes the brinksmanship being played out here but I think they will agree and the Republicans will get more cuts and give up the contentious issues.

It does seem as though Democrats are finally drawing a line in the sand, although in some respect they're lining off the corner Republicans have worked them into. They won't agree to defund Planned Parenthood, even it means shutdown. I applaud them for their late-game bravery, though I do wish they had taken stands earlier, like on allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire.

Compromise? How about this? Current national debt (and rising) $14,400,000,000,000.
Let's just round it off to a cool $15 Trillion (with a capital "T")! Now the deductions: $5T cut from Social programs for the middle class. Next, $5T cut from Defense including the "no bid" and "no good" contractors. Finally, a $5T increase to the treasury paid by a tax increase on all individuals making over $250,000 a year, eliminating tax loop-holes and handouts to oil companies and mega banking firms, and placing some serious duties on trading partners whose imports do not balance with our exports. Oh my, now we have a SURPLUS! That's what I call "compromise".

Democrats: But you gave us the money before.
Republicans: Enough is enough. We're taking a stand.
Democrats: GIVE US THE MONEY! Or I swear we're gonna shutdown!
Republicans: No!
Democrats: I need to dismember babies! [Salivating] I'm sustained by the sweet sweet blood of the innocents!
Republicans: You're sick but you know you can still pay for it yourself.
Democrats: Why should I pay for it if the government can abort kids for free?!
Republicans: Because it's not free. Taxpayers, i.e., Americans, pay for it.
Democrats: Huh? Quit your capitalist nonsense! Government needs to provide abortions!
Republicans: Then get your state to do it.
Democrats: I do that too but I need more baby blood!

I prefer to think the reason Republicans won't compromise is because they are inherently selfish and uncaring about the majority of the electorate. In fact it may even be worse than that. I believe the Conservative element have nothing but disdain for the great bulk of the American people and couldn't care less if they died and rotted in the streets.

So Ben from Reno, where exactly does the part where our President steps down come in?

Also, it is true that the average citizen can take care of him/herself, but the point of programs like Medicare/Medicaid is to take care of the old and poor citizens who *don't* have the resources to take care of themselves. That's the whole point. Ending these programs won't usher in a new era of freedom so much as a new era of poverty.

My prediction for the US in 2011 is … like many posting here... we will have a new President. I believe the reason "why" can be best described by a quote from T. Clancey's book "Dead or Alive", Putnam Press, 2010 ...

“Ladies and gentlemen, it is not the job of government to be the national nanny. The average citizen can look after his or her own needs without assistance from somebody who works here in Washington. America was founded because our citizens two-hundred-plus years ago didn’t know and didn’t especially care for their welfare.

America is about freedom. Freedom to make your own decisions, freedom to live in peace with your neighbors. Freedom to take our kids to Disney World in Florida, to a trout stream in Colorado. Freedom means deciding what you want to do with your life. Freedom is the natural state of nature. That’s how God wanted us to live.

The job of the President of the United States is to preserve, protect, and defend our country.

When the President does that job, the citizens can live any way they wish. That is the objective of the President: to protect the people and then to leave them alone…”

So in short, to repeat my stance on this matter: the problem here as I see it is that the Republicans are using the budgetary process to force policy changes using means of extortion that they couldn't achieve using only their hold on the House.

Indeed it is completely unreasonable for the Democrats to refuse to compromise by changing the policy of the United States to start funding this evil organization. I agree that the Republicans are being upstanding citizens by standing up to fight this overreach of their power.

Yes, RR, because Planned Parenthood had never ever been funded before by the federal government and the Democrats were being incredibly unreasonable by inserting completely unprecedented funding for it into the bill, which understandably upset the Republicans.